Every recommendation traced to its evidence. Every stakeholder position tracked.

CirclAI reads your interview transcripts, research documents, and client data — then synthesises findings, maps stakeholder positions, validates hypotheses, and generates evidence-based deliverables where every claim has a citation.

Structure your engagement View Pricing

The problem

A recommendation without evidence is just an opinion. Clients pay for evidence.

Consulting engagements produce dozens of interview transcripts, benchmark reports, data analyses, and client documents. The challenge is synthesis: which findings support which hypotheses, who said what, where the stakeholders agree and disagree, and whether the recommendations are actually grounded in evidence. CirclAI builds the evidence graph automatically — so when a board member asks "where does this recommendation come from?", the answer is one click away.

How CirclAI helps

Research Synthesis

Upload interview transcripts, benchmark reports, and data analyses. CirclAI extracts findings, links them to evidence sources, and identifies patterns across the research base — with citations to the source document and page.

Hypothesis Validation

Define your working hypotheses. CirclAI maps which evidence supports, refutes, or is neutral — so you can see which hypotheses survive scrutiny and which need revision.

Stakeholder Intelligence

Track what each stakeholder believes, wants, and blocks — across all interview transcripts and meeting notes. See where positions align, where they conflict, and who the real decision-makers are.

Board Presentation Generation

Generate evidence-based board presentations with findings, recommendations, risks, and implementation paths — every claim traceable to its source.

Contradiction Detection

Two interviewees say different things about the same topic? CFO says revenue is growing, sales data shows decline? CirclAI flags contradictions with both source citations.

What CirclAI extracts

●

Research Findings

Customer churn 2.3× industry average (source: Bain benchmark)

●

Stakeholder Positions

CFO wants headcount reduction, CTO advocates build over buy

●

Hypotheses

Churn driven by onboarding failure, not product quality

●

Evidence Sources

CEO interview 14 March, P&L FY25, employee survey n=342

●

Recommendations

Consolidate 3 BUs — saves £4.2M annually (evidence: 3 sources)

●

Implementation Risks

Union resistance to restructure (stakeholder: HR Director)

Example: Diagnostic Report — Operational Efficiency Review

✓ Research Base: 18 interviews, 6 data analyses, 4 benchmark reports synthesised — 47 distinct findings extracted

✓ Hypothesis Validation: 4 of 6 hypotheses supported by evidence, 1 refuted (cost overrun caused by scope creep, not resources — evidence from 3 project managers contradicts sponsor assumption)

✓ Stakeholder Map: 14 stakeholders mapped — CFO and COO aligned on timeline, CTO and CHRO misaligned on build-vs-buy, 2 silent blockers identified in operations

✓ Recommendations: 7 recommendations ranked by evidence strength × implementation feasibility — top recommendation supported by 12 evidence sources across 5 interviews and 3 data sets

✓ Contradictions: 3 found — sales forecast vs actual pipeline (CFO vs Sales Director), headcount plan vs hiring freeze (HR vs Finance), customer satisfaction score vs NPS trend

Structure your engagement

14-day free trial · No credit card required